Focus and Scope

JUSPI (Jurnal Sejarah Peradaban Islam) publishes scientific articles in the fields of historical, social, and humanities. JUSPI invites academics to publish their research articles, especially historical, social, and humanities studies with Islamic themes in:

• Islamic groups or communities
• Muslim minorities
• Culture and traditions
• Education
• Organization and politics
• Civilization
• Heritage and architecture
• Social change
• Intellectual and thought
• Biography
• Historiography
• Press and literacy
• Science and technology

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

After a manuscript has been submitted, it will an initial review of the manuscript by the editor of JUSPI. A manuscript will be reviewed to see the suitability of page formats, images, tables, cites, and reference lists as well as systematics article generation. The plagiarism element check is conducted through the Turnitin.

The editor will decide whether the manuscript in accordance with the scope and focus and proper to give to the reviewer. Sometimes, editors may recommend revision before submitting for peer-review. This initial review of activities usually takes a week. Submissions that pass the initial review will be assigned to two reviewers (Double-Blind Review). Based on the reviewer's recommendation, the editor will first make editorial decisions.

There are five possible editorial decisions to a manuscript: (1) be accepted; or (2) be revised; or (3) be re-submit; or (4) be sent to another publisher, or (5) be rejected.

The review process is done for 4-8 weeks. If desired, the reviewer may request to be reviewed again after the author revises his article. The decision about whether the article is accepted or not, fully in the authority of the Managing Editor based on recommendations from reviewers.

Publication Frequency

JUSPI (Jurnal Sejarah Peradaban Islam) publishes 2 (two) numbers each year, in July and January. The publication must be conducted at the end of each month. Articles published in JUSPI are available online and are free to access and download via its full-text address http://jurnal.uinsu.ac.id/index.php/juspi/issue/archive.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Benefits of open access for the author, include:

• Free access for all users worldwide.
• Authors retain copyright to their work.
• Increased visibility and readership.
• No spatial constraints.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

JUSPI is Jurnal Sejarah Peradaban Islam, for information and communication resources for academics, and observers of historical, social, and humanities studies. The published paper is the result of research, reflection, and actual critical study with respect to Islamic themes, for example, Islamic groups or communities, Muslim minorities, culture and traditions, education, organization and politics, civilization, heritage and architecture, social change, intellectual and thought, biography, historiography, press, and literacy, as well as science and technology. The following statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Program Studi Sejarah Peradaban Islam, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara).

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Plagiarism and Retraction Policy

JUSPI Editorial Board recognizes that plagiarism is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) upon identification of plagiarism/similarities in articles submitted for publication in JUSPI. JUSPI will use Turnitin's originality checking software as the tool for detecting similarities of texts in article manuscripts and the final version of articles ready for publication. A maximum of 25% of similarities is allowed for the submitted papers. Should we find more than 25% of the similarity index, the article will be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.

Definition:

Plagiarism involves the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Policy:

Papers must be original, unpublished, and not pending publication elsewhere. Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source.

Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and requires identification of the source, e.g., previous publication.

When plagiarism is identified, the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper in agreement with the following guidelines:

Level of Plagiarism

Minor: A short section of another article is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper.

Action: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made.

Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized without proper citation to the original paper.

Action: The submitted article is rejected, and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year.

Severe: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication.

Action: The paper is rejected, and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

It is understood that all authors are responsible for the content of their submitted paper as they all read and understand JUSPI's Copyright and Licensing Terms. If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.

If the second case of plagiarism by the same author(s) is identified, a decision on the measures to be enforced will be made by the Editorial board (Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial members) with the Chair of the Editor-in-Chief. The author(s) might be forbidden to submit further articles forever.

This policy applies also to material reproduced from another publication by the same author(s). If an author uses text or figures that have previously been published, the corresponding paragraphs or figures should be identified, and the previous publication referenced. It is understood that in the case of a review paper or a paper of a tutorial nature much of the material was previously published.

The author should identify the source of the previously published material and obtain permission from the original author and the publisher. If an author submits a manuscript to JUSPI with significant overlap with a manuscript submitted to another journal simultaneously, and this overlap is discovered during the review process or after the publications of both papers, the editor of the other journal is notified, and the case is treated as a severe plagiarism case. Significant overlap means the use of identical or almost identical figures and identical or slightly modified text for one-half or more of the paper. For self-plagiarism of less than one-half of the paper but more than one-tenth of the paper, the case shall be treated as intermediate plagiarism. If self-plagiarism is confined to the methods section, the case shall be considered minor plagiarism.

If an author uses some of his previously published material to clarify the presentation of new results, the previously published material shall be identified and the difference to the present publication shall be mentioned. Permission to republish must be obtained from the copyright holder. In the case of a manuscript that was originally published in conference proceedings and then is submitted for publication in JUSPI either in identical or in expanded form, the authors must identify the name of the conference proceedings and the date of the publication and obtain permission to republish from the copyright holder. The editor may decide not to accept this paper for publication.

However, an author shall be permitted to use material from an unpublished presentation, including visual displays, in a subsequent journal publication. In the case of a publication being submitted, that was originally published in another language, the title, date, and journal of the original publication must be identified by the authors, and the copyright must be obtained. The editor may accept such a translated publication to bring it to the attention of a wider audience. The editor may select a specific paper that had been published (e.g., a “historic” paper) for republication to provide a better perspective of a series of papers published in one issue of JUSPI. This republication shall be clearly identified as such and the date and journal of the original publication shall be given, and the permission of the author(s) and the publisher shall be obtained.

The JUSPI layout editor for the Journal is responsible for maintaining the list of authors subjected to penalties and will check that no authors of a submitted paper are on this list. If a banned author is identified, the layout editor will inform the Editor-in-Chief who will take appropriate measures. This policy will be posted on the website with the instructions for submitting a manuscript, and a copy will be sent to the authors with the confirmation email upon initial receipt of their original manuscript.

Retraction and/or Corrections

Authors are discouraged from withdrawing submitted manuscripts after it is in the publication process (review, copyedit, layout, etc.,). During that time, JUSPI had spent valuable resources besides time spent in the process. Should under any circumstances that the author(s) still request for a withdrawal, the author(s) must send an email to JUSPI's editor using the same email address used in correspondence.

JUSPI's editors shall consider retracting a publication if:

• They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either because of a major error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error) or because of fabrication (e.g., of data) or falsification (e.g., image manipulation).
• It constitutes plagiarism.
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication).
• It contains material or data without authorization for use.
• Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (e.g., libel, privacy).
• It reports unethical research.
• It has been published solely based on a compromised or manipulated peer review process.
• The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

Notices of retraction would:

• Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (i.e., in all online versions).
• Clearly identify the retracted article (e.g., by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article).
• Be clearly identified as a retraction (i.e., distinct from other types of correction or comment).
• Be published promptly to minimize the harmful effects.
• Be freely available to all readers (i.e., not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers).
• State who is retracting the article.
• State the reason(s) for retraction.
• Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language.

Retractions are not usually appropriate if:

• The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings
• The main findings of the work are still reliable, and corrections could sufficiently address errors or concerns.
• An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation.
• Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view, these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations or the conclusions of the article.

JUSPI's editors shall consider issuing an expression of concern if:

• they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors.
• there is evidence that the findings are unreliable, but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case.
• they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive.
• an investigation is underway, but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time.

JUSPI's editors shall consider issuing a correction if:

• a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error).
• the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e., a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).

The mechanism follows the guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

Review Guidelines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is a good reason.
2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
   
3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
4. Ready? Read through the entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound scientific reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.

 Full Review Process of Manuscript

1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organization?
2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that the reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.

Repository Policy

JUSPI (Jurnal Sejarah Peradaban Islam) is following PKP PN preservation services. The pre-print, post-print, and publisher's version/PDF can be archived under the following conditions. Please also read our Copyright Notice and the Archiving notice. 

As soon as JUSPI has published an article, the version of the article that has been submitted, accepted for publication, and the published version can be used for a variety of scholarly, even commercially purposes, and subject to full attribution under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

Author(s) may deposit and use the document as follows:

• on personal website.
• on the company or institutional repository.
• on the author's preferred subject repositories.
• with individuals requesting personal use for teaching and training within the author’s institution, and as part of an author’s grant applications or theses/doctorate submissions.

Article Processing Charge

Waiver Policy

We encourage our authors to publish their papers with us and don’t wish the cost of publication processing fees to be an insurmountable barrier. Authors don't need to pay for Article Publication if the quality of the article qualified with our standard and requirements, but JUSPI reserve the right to approve or reject any waiver application. The waiver's decision will be communicated to the corresponding author within one week after the request is received.